On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 11:19:59AM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote: > Isn't the idea of blocking with preemption enabled bogus? > > So instead of disallowing migration with preemption disabled, KASSERT > in all blocking primitives that preemption is enabled and fix the fallout > at the call sites?
Is it now safe to use blocking functions under kpreempt_disable()? What about the single processor case?
